Babar alias Jani vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 22 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Babar alias Jani VS State Ss. 302(b), 506 & 34---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 22---Qatl-i-amd, criminal intimidation, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Presence of the eye-witnesses at the place of occurrence not proved---Accused was charged that he along with his co-accused committed murder of the brother of complainant by inflicting churri blows---Per the prosecution case, the complainant for purpose of fetching vegetables was standing in front of shop S-Sweets at 11:00 am; the deceased reached in front of S-Sweets and also stopped in search of riders---Similarly, brother of the complainant, rickshaw driver, along with two given up witnesses, also stopped in front of S-Sweets in search of riders---Meanwhile, co-accused and the appellant arrived at the spot-on a motorcycle, and the occurrence occurred---Scaled site plan was prepared on the instructions of both the prosecution witnesses---In the scaled site plan, the presence of the deceased was shown at point "B," while the complainant was shown at point "D" and eye-witnesses were present at point "E" and from point "F" appellant and co-accused reached and after the incident fled away---In the scaled site plans, the place of occurrence was shown in front of the vegetable shop of "MK" and the deceased, prosecution witnesses and the accused were not present in front of S-Sweets---Evidence of both the prosecution witnesses was unreliable and not trustworthy regarding their presence at the place of occurrence---Although, the site plan was not a substantive piece of evidence according to Art. 22 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, yet it reflected the view of the crime scene and the same could be used to contradict or disbelieve eye-witnesses---So, the prosecution witnesses could not justify their presence at the spot---Thus, all the evidence about the presence of eye-witnesses at the spot appeared unreliable---With that background, the presence of the alleged eye-witnesses on the spot seemed doubtful---Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to bring home a charge against the appellant beyond any reasonable doubt---Appeal against conviction was allowed accordingly.

Babar alias Jani vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 22 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ